x152

Yeah those HME folks are real innovators. I am sure they overwhelmed the crowd at the FDIC with some new piece of ingenuity.

Pierce is clearly showing their market dominance and ability to produce new chassis with the users in mind. I really like the styling, but if you check out the interior, the position of the motor confines divides the rear users (just like the Mack CF). Without seeing it first-hand, it looks somewhat isolating in such a large cab. Many Departments, including mine, are trying to have the crew members try and always exit the curbside crew cab door whenever possible. The engine cowls placements appears to prevent this from happening. Something that many Departments may have a problem with? For all of the focus on safety, Pierce may have missed the mark, if one crew member always has to step-off into oncoming traffic. Not that the driver and many of us have been doing this for years, but why not make certain the design allows for crossover of both crew members? Wondering if anyone at FDIC can comment or verify if the rear crew area is a big deal or not?

Which is exactly why the facts of the story should be affirmed prior to public rants. I have known the Fire Fighter in question as a friend for over 20 years and have no doubt to HIS integrity. Much like 99.9% of the people pushing this boycott, I was NOT present when the issue arose. I am just amazed at how quiet HE is about this and how many OTHER people are running hastily all over the internet without having much detail. My organization has worked with these establishments on numerous occasions and have found them to be very friendly to assisting public safety officers. I would hate for the actions of one or two morons to be portrayed as being part of an organized discrimination campaign by a business. Looking at what I have heard and read, there appears to be something missing from story. In 2011, for a large business to openly refuse entrance to people because they are of Asian decent, seems to be like trying to put your tongue on the third-rail? I could be wrong, but was there any attempt to sit-down with a representative of management (and I am not talking about the bar manager on duty that night) trying to discuss the issue before this thing was shot out of the canon? With respect to my quiet and humble friend, it appears that it may have been more prudent and systematic steps that could have been taken, prior to others using his face and background with a viral internet surge. Every organization has its misfits, morons, criminals and malcontents (the Yankees have a full roster). However, it is stretch to suggest that the Company is condoning the behavior without the Company having an opportunity to be aware of the behavior and discipline/terminate those responsible and make amends with those harmed. The internet posts and Facebook pages were created by Sunday at noon, this incident happened on Saturday night. Kind of hard to allow for a response or answer to a complaint and allow for information to be digested or processed. Kind of like prejudicing an entire Fire Department or Police Department because of one bad member or Officer.

Good points as usual Barry. And to further the points, I have had the privilege of attending numerous IAFF functions across this country (Convention, Safety, Leadership, EMS, Human Relations, etc). In all of the time that I have spent attending and meeting with Union members from 2 countries you know what subject does not get discussed? Volunteers. Sorry to disappoint, but kind of funny how those that have never attended the conferences or been affiliated with the IAFF, seem to have such an understanding as to what their priorities are. What do we talk about at conventions and seminars? Little things like: staffing, collective bargaining rights, internal funding initiatives (the NASCAR sponsorship and debate was always entertaining), safety studies, safety awareness, and lots of networking amongst folks that share a common love of the job. Guess what, much of the work that is funded through these studies benefits all fire fighters, not just IAFF members. The infamous By-Law provision that is so endeared by the anti-IAFF crowd has been around for decades and does not deal with volunteer fire fighters exclusively. For those that have bothered to read it, there is also a prohibition on work as a part-time fire fighter, Police Officer, ambulance service, and some other related fields. I guess the same animosity used by the volunteer contingent could be echoed by Police Chiefs and AMR executives? Yet, the volunteers are hogging this one just for themselves? (Invite the cops, they will feel left out, those AMR guys are cheap and probably will stiff you on the bar tab.) Also, I should mention that I do not agree with the IAFF or anyone (including my wife) dictating what I do. However, I do understand why these provisions exist and continue to exist after many years. In my experience, while my local might be somewhat tainted about the concept of volunteering, the only issues ( or tensions related to the issues) have arisen when members of the Local were placing themselves within the confines of a Department or organization with a chartered IAFF Local. I do not need an IAFF By-Law to tell me how wrong and/or stupid that is. ** PS - For those still confused about FLSA...I would highly recommend the document "Managing Volunteer Fire Fighters for FLSA Compliance: A Guide for Fire Chiefs and Community Leaders" published by the International Association of Fire Chiefs (not the IAFF!). The Federal Government wrote the laws, so you will have to blame them for this and not the IAFF. Sorry again.

Pete: Can you expand upon the concept of "musical fire trucks"? I may be wrong, but your remarks seem to indicate that you support the concept of having the career staff jump around to roll whatever fire trucks are available (or as many fire trucks possible). I have a pretty good understanding of the fire service as a whole, but this "novel" concept appears to be something unique all but to the wisdom of just a very few in one area of southwestern Connecticut. Is the concept of a "Company" operation dead, or have all of us been blind to the value of breaking our crews into many pieces for promote the "benefit" of lots of rolling stock in order to appear that things are greater than they are? Just think what the FDNY could do with a 6 member ladder company or 7 member rescue company? How bout Maryland, those County Departments splitting the career crews into slices and rolling them out hot? I keep hearing about how terrible it is that the SFRD has such a problem with splitting their Companies into fragmented truck drivers, but am still looking into the tangible results of where such a great system is in place? - Boston - FDNY - PG County - LA County - Houston - Philly - Jacksonville - Detroit - Chicago - Hartford - Bridgeport - Yonkers Anyone else promoting this concept? Anyone in the business?

Just thought I would chime in.... Although I have significant disagreement with Pete regarding some of his remarks and positions, he has always remained calm, courteous, and professional when debating this issue here or when interacting in person. If you want to beat-up his opinion or position, try and do so without going personal. Yes, I find his remarks somewhat obtuse to my beliefs, but his general poise and tact could be a lesson for others involved in this debate (I am not referring to those debating here). Just trying to keep the discussion where it should be. PS - Geppetto starting to come out of his shell, could his true identity soon be revealed??

Pete: Are you aware of the qualifications for the other applicants for this job? I am aware of several fire officials and a former federal law enforcement official all with substantial resumes and experience. I wonder what precluded them for consideration for this job?

The FLSA violations have been going on for years without challenge. One would wonder at what point the issue catches up with them, but why start enforcement now?

The Long Ridge Paid Drivers Association is currently seeking money for past wages in excess of over a million dollars. The Paid Driver's Association is suing the Volunteer Fire Company for the money owed. The interesting part is that several of the 9 members of the Paid Driver's Association all serve and run the same volunteer Department in volunteer capacities, including positions such as Chief, Assistant Chief, and Treasurer... This should be great testimony for the Chief, Assistant Chief and Treasurer who are all suing themselves. How would that work under cross examination? Would the Chief have to quickly change costumes and jump back and forth between roles? Sound ridiculous? You bet it is....what is even more ridiculous is the concept of using this same highly dysfunctional system as the platform to build a new Fire Department on. What could go wrong?

Pete: For someone who often talks with the spirit of cooperation and keeping an open mind, it appears that you are blindly following your Team into this one. So let me ask this question: If the Engine and Ladder from Eagle Hose and the Engine from Fountain Hose in Ansonia were sent mutual aid to Seymour and the Seymour Chief then ordered the Ansonia Chief to cancel, even though Ansonia had 21 of their Fire Fighters on scene in Seymour and Seymour only had their Chief, it would be perfectly ok? Wouldn't the Ansonia Chief have a responsibility for the safety and accountability of his/her 21 personnel? What would the basis for the Seymour Chief to cancel the Ansonia Chief even though 99% of the personnel operating on scene were under the direction/supervision of the Ansonia Chief? What if we changed this same scenario with the FDNY sending the same number of units into Pelham? What if this was Hartford going into Windsor? How about Yonkers going into Hastings? Would you or would you not find that decision to be strange and possibly motivated by something other than sound principals? Why was it acceptable to have other volunteer Chiefs respond, but the "card-carrying" Chief with the most players on the field gets the turn-around? Oh and sorry Izzy, for some of us, this is an important issue. If it bothers you to read it, roll-on to the "Scanning in Ulster County" thread. That should be less-stressful.

Sage: Taking the "Collective Bargaining in the Workplace" 3 credit elective class at the University of New Haven does not make you a labor or legal expert. You are entitled to your opinion, but until you have some experience in dealing with labor issues or working within a Union, you should avoid statements indicating your facts, because they are far from factual. The Waterbury situation was by no means automatic and was based upon year's of fiscal mismanagement. The State Oversight Board and subsequent abolition of existing labor agreements in Waterbury was created by an act of the Connecticut Legislature and not some language in existing in law. The Union's responsibility is not subjective to your perceived opinion of what their mission should be. The Union's responsibility to their membership is based upon the direction and collective will established by a particular Union. Meaning....every Union may differ based upon the where majority of their players feel as to take them. Not being a member of the Newark PBA, I have no idea what basis was made for not opening a contract or accepting give-backs. However, I can be certain that the facts behind the Police Union's rationale will not be found within 1 or 2 articles from the local press rag. There is usually a lot more to a story such as this and I pretty sure that the future of those 167 Officers was weighed heavily prior to any decision being made.

Not for nothing.....but has Geppetto finally spoken? Really? The silence has been broken and perhaps now we many finally find out the true identity of this infamous string-puller! PS - if we could all add a bit of sense of humor to some of our rants (myself included), we could surely increase the civility of our discussions.

Pete: Any chance you can explain how an article about budget shortfalls and the former Mayor's need to consolidate personnel have any relation? You stated that you have some FACTS that show that there has been no savings under the consolidation of career employees, I was curious to know where the facts came from? I hope it is not solely based upon some unrelated article about insufficient budgetary funding in the local newspaper. If you also want to do some research, you will find that those "fiscally responsible" folks chose to significantly reduce the Police and Fire overtime budgets well beyond what the respective Department heads requested and clearly demonstrated would be required. Given that most staffing issues are driven from contact language (that was agreed upon by City Boards), the Chiefs responsible for budgeting are usually pretty good and determining what would be needed for the upcoming year (factoring in wage requirements, staffing vacancies, etc.) Yet, the BOF choses to significantly underfund the overtime budget. This is the definition of Manufactured Crisis and this little "blame-game" has been going for years and has little (or nothing) to do with a merger of career employees two and half years ago. It has everything to do with politics and people posturing for useless sound-bites and headlines and using no common sense when it comes to paying for contractually obligated costs. Kind of similar to all of those politicians blaming State employees for their pensions, but for years, the same Politicians failed to fund pensions systems to the amounts that their actuaries told them would be needed. It apparently can also serve and give play-time for the agenda of those with their definite allergy and prejudice to anything "Stamford Fire Rescue". Kind of silly for anyone to ignore Department's heads projections by hundreds of thousands of dollars and then criticize the same agencies and managers when the money that was not properly funded to begin with runs out. Although you were not present, the fiscal records were crystal clear prior to the merger of any career employees that Fire Fighters under the previous two-tiered system were costing upwards (and over) $20,000 annually for the same position north of those heathens downtown. The process to fix the issue may have been uglier and more contentious than that of one to create a National Health Care System, but please do not malign the history or fact that the old system had significant problems with regard to career employee cost, accountability and management. Does an opinion based upon the quoted Advocate article also mean that the Stamford Police Department should be split into two Police agencies functioning with the same City? or does the standard just apply to Stamford Fire? Thanks-

Sage: No, not surprisingly, what you posted is not true (I believe someone who dealt with this crime first-hand also corrected you about this when you posted the same statement on another local board yesterday). The new Governor stated that he is personally opposed to the death penalty, but clearly recognized the severity and heinous nature of this crime and stated that he would not support anything encompassing existing death row inmates or pending incidents (such as the one in Cheshire). Given, the 20 (or more) likely years of appeals and the method to be used to execute a person in this State, the sentence (although just and warranted) is a paper tiger. The only way these two animals will ever see fitting justice at this point is if the general population of the prison where they reside has access to them.

Seth: Shut the site down......your family, your health, and your income are far more important. Not to sound harsh, but YOU are running the site and bearing the financial responsibilities. The site is a great idea, but not at your personal expense. Take care of what is most important and perhaps in time, the opportunity to bring back the site will be there. Perhaps not? Thanks for providing the site and services and my best to you and your family.

The rig was positioned between on-coming traffic and operating fire personnel. The rig took the hit and not the personnel. All Stainless Body. Way too early to tell if will be repaired or disposed of. The 2002 HME (former E4) will be utilized. Fire Trucks can be repaired or replaced. The 4 Fire Fighters working on the other side of the impact zone can not! A good visual example of why we need to place "big red" between us and them.

Yes, what stoke of brilliance. Let's run firetrucks with just one person on board. As long as something that is big and red and makes lots of noise shows up, that should be sufficient. Also known as the "S and S" operational policy. SCOUT it out and SCREAM for help if you find something.....service at its best. It's 2010.........do you know where your responsibilities are?

Agreed Spin, the process of reducing the priority of the response or managing the total number of resources based upon additional information is a wise and prudent measure. Fire Departments throughout this country practice such policies and for good reason. However, that was not the case in Stamford and the decision to do such was made just weeks after the Chief of the particular Department in question promised in a public forum that nothing like this would ever occur again. This discussion is not about a managed or controlled response; rather, it is about the quality of management decisions within a particular organization.

Media outlets in Connecticut are reporting that at least 1 Bridgeport FF has died and another is in critical condition as a result of a late afternoon fire on Elmwood Avenue in Bridgeport. More info to follow. Thoughts and prayers are with the fallen and the Bridgeport FD.

The correct funeral info is at www.iaff.org, click on the upper left corner.

Many reports now confirming 2 Fire Fighters dead in Bridgeport as a result of fire this afternoon.

Alpine: Thanks again for the response. However, I must be facing some type of disconnect, because "unified" and "separate" are really not intertwined. Again, the details of this concept appear to be well known throughout the Stamford volunteer system, but the career side have not been told much of anything. It really is an exercise in futility for us to try and rework a plan or offer justifiable solutions. City Hall has cast their plan and for us to banter about what should be or could be is really moot. I am trying to gain understanding to the model. My questions are many and mostly due to the fact that it completely is foreign in the logic, construction, and position of almost anyone in the Fire Services or Municipal Government. Whether this plan works will really be a matter of personal perspective. Time will ultimately dictate which side will be stating "I told you so". I am pretty sure of one thing........given the state of what most municipal governments and communities with multiple fire jurisdictions are facing in the need to streamline (i.e. consolidate), I really find it hard to believe that 5 years down the road, there will not be a new push for both sides to combine into one entity. And thus, the process will start all over again. Historically, we have seen our predecessors lack foresight into thinking about the "what-ifs" and leaving the next generations large piles of garbage to sort through. So I will end with the question: What mechanism are being designed to create parallel structures and principals for the 2 separate organizations to "blend" down the road, if such a need is warranted or demanded? If any?

Thanks for the response and I think the actual Brown plan is different than what you may have heard during the previous meetings. I appreciate the info, but still do not see the 1 chain of command. I see 2 very different organizations operating within the same City boundaries. I am all for change and different perspectives, but I still have not seen anything to show how the 2 potential large Fire Departments in the City will be on the same page? From what I have seen presented, there will be 2 organizations with very different structures. In my capacity, I have tried to tear down walls and barriers amongst the various groups. With the exception of 1 location, I think we have done a good job at fostering mutual respect. However, in the spirit of honest conversation, can anyone honestly show how this will ultimately produce a unified fire service? Or is the goal to produce 1 southern unified service and 1 northern unified service? Thanks

Sorry Alpine, not an accurate statement. The City Fire plan stated that each Long Ridge Station would be staffed with 1 - 3 person (minimum) Engine Company. That would be 1 Officer and 2 Fire Fighters in each of their Stations 24/365. In addition, the 10 personnel from LRFC could have been absorbed into the existing career system and utilized to staff a tanker or other vehicle or used to offset overtime, as used in the present staffing situation. Regardless of whether you support or oppose this plan, I am still intrigued as to where the "fix" is in the new plan. So far, I have only seen a proposal to build walls and create a new title. Having been witness to one recent and blatant example of the lack of a unified structure within the fire services, I am having trouble seeing where this new system will address the problems of the old. Since the information about this plan appears to be exclusive to members of the volunteer companies, perhaps you could help out those from the other side. I would really love to learn more of the details. Perhaps in doing so, there would be more answers and fewer questions. Thanks-

Pete: Interesting how well versed you are on the labor history, particularly because you were not part of it. Also interesting to see your wealth of knowledge with regard to labor relations, union structure, Connecticut Labor Law (MERA), etc. You speak as if you have extensive knowledge in the complex issues involving labor issues and relations in Stamford? Sadly, I have read not one word of what you have posted with regard to the labor component as being accurate. As someone who was as forth coming to admit that he would rather get a job at the sacrifice of an existing Stamford career Fire Fighter, perhaps you could be as equally honest as to where your version of the labor facts is coming from. Not sure if you brought a copy of MERA with you to Afghanistan? Because if you did? I will gladly mail you the actual legal version (as recognized by this State for many years). The copy you must be reading from must have been defective? Let me know- Thanks-